I should probably treat this issue with a dignified silence, but being neither silent nor dignified, here goes…
The following was recently posted on a filesharing website above a copy of the audio jacket for ‘Ruso and the Demented Doctor':
“Ah – I have been fooled, by once again the publishers ‘renaming’ a book – this is in fact the same as Terra Incognita! I thought I have found the third in the series, as nowhere on the cover does it mention Terra Incognita!! However, having gone to the bother of ripping it etc, here it is – it is unabridged and read by Sean Barrett – who is a different narrator from the earlier upload, which was Simon Vance.
Thank you to the original uploader of Terra Incognita who introduced me to the series”
Aargh! It’s nice to know that people like the books enough to want to share illegal copies with total strangers across the internet. BUT…
If they can’t afford to buy it, couldn’t they at least get themselves down to the local library and shell out the very small sum that’s required to borrow the audio and listen to it legally? (If the library hasn’t got it, the staff can usually get it from somewhere that has.) Writers don’t make any money out of audio loans, but most public libraries desperately need cash, and more bodies through the door will help put their visitor numbers up and support them in the scramble for public money.
Moreover, just to reiterate the obvious… the companies who go to the bother and expense of making the recordings do it in order for their staff to earn a living. More piracy means less revenue for them, and less revenue can tip the balance so that a marginally profitable recording becomes a loss-making one. That’s not a great incentive for the company to record the writer’s next book, is it?
I know there are people who will argue for file-sharing far more fluently and indignantly than I can argue against it. I don’t imagine any of the above will make any difference to them. I just feel better for saying it. Thanks for listening. Legally.